National Republican., 1887-01-15

plished by tariff revision | favor con
tinuanCG OF the tax on luXuries.N
Mr. McCfeary, of Kentucky: "l am op-
posed to removing the tax OIL tobacco or
fruit brandy; in fact, to any change in the
internal revenue laws until our present
tariff law is revised. desire TO relieve the
neCessaries of life. as far as practicable, of
tile heavy burdens imposed upon them. To
express 1t briefly, there should he a con
seryative reduction of the tariff in spirit
Of fairness to all interests "
Mr.. Hepburn, OF Iowa. al am opposed,
at this tlme to any interference with the
internal revenue laws. | approve the
removal of the duty on sugar, when i'm
ported from any country that admits Our
field products free aud that does not i'm
pose an export duty on sugar. II the oppor-
tunity presents itself will vote for free
lumber, either as an independent PROPOSE
tion or In combination with the sugar qties.
tiOn.N
Mr. Conger, of Iowa: al don't know what
| would do on the question of removing the
tobacco tax; it would depend on the shape
In which IL is presented | am hardly pre-.
pared to state my views at present. BY all
means continue the tariff on sugar.
Mr.. Henderson, Of Iowa: III am opposed
to removing the tax of tobacco distilled
spirits used in the arts, or peach brandy,
aud think II any attempt is IN tde to con
slider bill having this object iu view 1t may
result in sufficient number OF Republicans
Joining hands with Mr.. Morrison in taking
up his bill In preference. a stroug reduction
OF the duty ON sugar would, believe, be ac
ceptable. When sugar goes on the free
list, | believe lumber and salt will accom-
paDy it.o
Mr.. Weaver, of Iowa, favors the continu.
ance OF the tax on tobacco, but would re-
move the duty oil sugar.
Mr.. Holmes, OF Iowa; "l think the tax on
tobacco should be continued. sugar ought
to be free, | would give the Louisiana
gentlemen what they have so long sought
free trade"
Mr.. Hall, of Iowa: "The tax ON tobacco
should not be removed. would advocate
Il reduction In the duty on sugar. would
prefer reduction on other articles, but as
caunot have my way | will accept the re-
lief on sugar, II that is to be the article on
which the fight is to be made
Mr.. Frederick, of Iowa "There should
be no reduction IN the tobacco tax. !
would like to See the duty on sugar re-
moved. think 1t SHOULD be.n
Mr.. Bland, Of Missouri "l am opposed
to the removal of the tax ON tuba: eco or the
duty ON sugar.
Mr.. Wolford, of Kentucky: " The tax
on tobacco should hot be removed. | have
uOl given blllCltul luOuBub W luG sugar
question, and, therefore, would prefer not
to express myself on that subject"
Mr.. FUran, of ONO: "l am not entirely
satisfied ON the tobacco question, | don't
think the removal of the tariff on sugar
would be Of the slightest benefit to the con-
sumer, Tor the powerful combination that
controls the sugar interests would sustain
prices. think the tariff ought to be re-
vised, but 1t should be done by its friends
and not its enemies"
~ don't believe In telling you folks what
we are going to do" was the remark made
by MIR. Mills, OF Texas, when the questions
were put to him, but he relented sufficiently
to give forth the following: "ADy bill that
has in view the reduction Of the tobacco tax
would have To be leavened with reductions
on a great many other articles before 1t
would have my support. | think sugar duty
should be reduced TO reasonable figure.
At present 1t is too high.n
Mr.. Jones, of Texas: at 10 sufficient to say
that am Democrat. OF course the neCes-
saries Of life must be relieved first and lux
uries, such us tobacco and whisky, after
ward, would not vote for free sugar; the
duty might be reduced some"
Mr. Culberson, of Texas, favors taking
the duty oil wool-in fact, make all raw
material free. There should be consider
able reduction on manufactured iron and on
wooden goods. 1t would take the tax off
fruit, brandy and tobacco and reduce the
duty on sugar to Il strictly revenue basis
Lumber and salt should he on the free list"
Mr.. 1hrockmorton, of Texas, is sop
posed to removal OF the internal revenue
taxes until the public debt is paid think
gradual reduction should take place.
Sugar should go on the free list"
Mr.. Miller, of Texas II am opposed to
any change in the internal revenue avs
| until something is done to relieve the neces-
saries of life. Sugar should not 90 on the
free list; II 1t were to be placed there
| then We would have to increase the duties
on other articles to fill up the hole that
would be made by taking away one fourth
of our present revenue from import duties. I"
Mr.. Grain, of Texas: ~ am opposed to
the removal Of the tobacco tax, and heartily
IN favor Of continuing the present duty on
sugar.
"Under suitable conditions, / will cheer.
fully vote to take the tax off tobacco"
was the reply of Mr.. Catchings, of Mssis-
sippi. What those conditions were was not
disclosed "l think sugar duties should be
continued" he added, ''until we know our
abilities in the sugar making line"
Mr.. Barry, of Mississippi: ~ am hardly
prepared to give expression to my views on
these subjects at present, AS things are, |
am opposed to removing the tax on tobacco.
| will not anticipate my views or my vote
on the sugar question, but will wait until
the subject comes before the House"
Mr.. Dorsey, of Nebraska: "l would not
support any move to take the tax off TO-
bacCo. | am In favor of free sugar, or, at
least, Of u reduction of the duty. We can
afford to reduce the duty on any OF the
articles that are classed as the necessaries
Of life"
IL am decidedly In favor of the removal
of the internal revenue tax on tobacco and
believe In free sugar, with bounties TO
actual producers" 50 said Mr.. Pettibone,
| of Tennessee.
Mr.. Mcmillan, of Tennessee: 'I think
there should be reduction of the duty on
sugar, but don't think tariff reductions
should be confined to sugar; they ought to
| be extended to steel rails and TO many OF
| the grades of woolen and cotton goods used
| by the masses of the people, AS well as
other things that could be named. II the
entire sugar duty is removed 1t will make
impossible the reduction Of some other du-
ties equally onerous that pay less revenue
| There should he modification OF the In
| ternal revenue tax on tobacco. There
could be some very material modification
made in the internal system without sacri
flcing much revenue. This Congress vii
sadly neglect It's duty and evince less patri
otism than it ought TO have II II refuses Il
tighten the burden of the taxpayers"
Mr. Richardson, of tennessee would ik,
TO see the tobacco tax removed, but wal
not enthusiastic about it, "LegislatiOn OF
neccssaries first. favor most strongly
general revision Of the tariff, and emphati
cally object to articles being singled out fo
relief | would oppose any measure look
ing TO that end"
Mr.. Glass, Of Tennessee: "As long a
the war debt is in existence the taxes oI
tobacco and whisky should be continued
think 1t would he infinitely better to re
move the heavier burdens on clothing, &c
favor a reduction Of duty on sugar, and
in that particular, | approve the Morrison
bill, We derive our largest revenue from
sugar the incidental protection to the pro
ducer is also assured. am strongly Op
] L.n.ul IN LL.untins. | thInl. thnm a nari ~ .